Same sex marriage plans have been voted through by MPs following a lengthy House of Commons debate. TIM RIDGWAY, BILL GARDNER and TOM HARPER report on what this means for those living and working in Sussex.

Brighton and Hove is set to become the gay marriage capital of Europe after Tuesday, February 5’s landmark ruling, city leaders said.

The vote to legalise same-sex marriage was welcomed by LGBT groups, church leaders and politicians yesterday (February 6).

As well as making thousands of couples happy, civil partnership ceremonies have brought millions of pounds to the city’s economy since they were legalised in 2005.

Nearly 2,500 ceremonies have taken place - only the London Borough of Westminster has conducted more.

He said: “We could become the gay marriage capital of Europe, not just the UK.

“I hope we will be the top city because people come here to have a great time.

“Ultimately it’s about love and breaking down another barrier to equality.”

Liberal city

Linda Holm, Brighton and Hove City Council’s registration manager, said the local authority would be drawing up plans to deal with a possible surge in marriages in the next 18 months.

She said: “Brighton and Hove is known internationally as very liberal and for embracing same sex couples.

“We have already benefited from couples coming not only from Britain but from all over the world.

“It’s really positive to the city and to the city’s economy with hundreds of thousands, if not millions of pounds of business, spent here.”

Geoffrey Bowden, the council’s economic development and culture committee chairman, said: “This is about equality not economy.

“If there’s a boost to Brighton and Hove as a result then great but the fundamental thing issue is about equal treatment towards people’s sexual orientation.

“I had my own civil partnership in Brighton’s Royal Pavilion and I’m very pleased I did.”

Religious ceremonies

Keith Sharpe, of Changing Attitude Sussex, which campaigns for equality in the Church of England, said: “I think it is a very good development for gay people.

“It is a good thing that the victory was as great as it was.

“We know that the Quakers, Unitarians and Liberal Jews will offer the religious ceremonies.

“I hope that the Church of England will have a debate and consider the idea of allowing individual churches to decide whether they want to hold the ceremonies, as they do with deciding whether to re-marry divorcees.”

Terry Burn, resident warden at Brighton Quaker Meeting House, said: “The Quakers are very supportive of gay marriage in general and in our meeting house.

“We welcome gay weddings here at the meeting house, but they have got to be Quakers.”

'Natural progression'

For Paul Elgood the vote on same sex marriage marked an important step on the road to equality.

The Hove-based charity worker and equality activist said: “Ten years ago we will look back at this and wonder what all the fuss was about. This is about natural progression and a question of fairness.”

Last year, Mr Elgood entered into a civil partnership with his interior designer partner Lee Shingles.

Six months on, he admits while the decision by MPs on Tuesday was important, it did not alter things for himself.

Mr Elgood, 40, said: “For us, the way we did it was perfect.

Happy in partnership

“It was completely special and we did it exactly as we wanted to do it so I do not think we will convert it into a wedding.

“But that is not to say that others will have different views.

“This is all about natural progression and I think there are enough safeguards in the bill in terms of religious premises.

“People should be comfortable with it.”

Lengthy debate

The vote of 400 MPs in favour to 175 against took place in the House of Commons after a lengthy six-hour debate.

MPs were given a free vote meaning they were not ordered to vote a particular way by party whips.

Their decision to back the bill at second reading signifies that they approve of it in principle. The legislation will now receive more detailed parliamentary scrutiny.

The bill will legalise gay marriage and enable same-sex couples to get married in both civil and religious ceremonies in England and Wales.

However, after opposition by Church of England and others, the religious institution must formally consent beforehand.

'Fantastic moment'

The bill will also allow couples who had previously entered into civil partnerships to convert their relationship into a marriage.

“People keep on saying it’s about equality, which of course it is, but for me it is also about citizenship.

“Marriage is a fundamental building block in society and there’s a huge section of society that was excluded from that and now they’re not.

“Now people can make a choice about marriage.”

Mr Fanshawe added: “My partner and I are planning a civil partnership this summer. Whether this changes things I do not know. I will have to ask him.”

The vote

In Sussex, 12 of 16 MPs supported the plans with only Tim Loughton (East Worthing and Shoreham) and Henry Smith (Crawley) voting against.

Norman Baker was one of two MPs in Sussex not to vote. A spokesman for his office said he was away on ministerial duties in France.

Speaking after the debate, Brighton Kemptown MP Simon Kirby said he was “proud” to support it.

He said: “The vote marks an important milestone in the evolution of the institution of marriage and the advance of equality in the UK. “The legislation strikes the right balance between equality for same sex couples and the rights of people of faith.”

Brighton Pavilion MP Caroline Lucas said: “While the Conservative catfight over the vote will fade into insignificance, the momentous occasion on which MPs were given the chance to stand up for equality in marriage will be remembered for many years to come.”

HOW OUR MPS VOTED

Caroline Lucas (Brighton Pavilion – Green) - FOR

Simon Kirby (Brighton Kemptown - Con) - FOR

Mike Weatherley (Hove - Con) - FOR

Tim Loughton (East Worthing and Shoreham – (Con) - AGAINST

Peter Bottomley (Worthing West – Con) - FOR

Norman Baker (Lewes – Lib Dem) – DID NOT VOTE

Charles Hendry (Wealden - Con) - FOR

Stephen Lloyd (Eastbourne – Lib Dem) - FOR

Francis Maude (Horsham – Con) - FOR

Henry Smith (Crawley – Con) - AGAINST

Nicholas Soames (Mid Sussex – Con) - FOR

Nick Herbert (Arundel and South Downs – Con) - FOR

Nick Gibb (Bognor Regis and Littlehampton – Con) - FOR

Andrew Tyrie (Chichester – Con) – DID NOT VOTE

Amber Rudd (Hastings and Rye – Con) - FOR

Greg Barker (Bexhill and Battle – Con) - FOR

What MPs said

Tim Loughton (East Worthing and Shoreham) “If this Bill passes through Parliament and becomes law, it will not be the end of the world as we know it; a new Sodom and Gomorrah will not take hold of our island.

“Similarly, if it does not go through, it will not signal some resurgence of intolerance or inequality.

“No one will lose any rights to equal treatment and respect under the law and in the eyes of society.

“The real problem is not a lack of equality under the law but people’s perceptions of a lack of equality for those with different sexual persuasions.”

Nick Herbert (Arundel and South Downs) “Are the marriages of millions of straight people about to be threatened because a few thousand gay people are permitted to join?

“Millions will be watching us today—not just gay people, but those who want to live in a society where people are treated equally and accepted for who they are.

“They will hear our words and remember our votes. I hope that, once again, this House will do the right thing.”

Peter Bottomley (Worthing West) “Essentially, we are asking whether we can remove the barriers that stop same-sex couples enjoying the commitment—the ‘at one’ meaning—of marriage. That is what the Bill comes down to. It does not redefine marriage; it just takes away barriers.”

Caroline Lucas (Brighton Pavilion) “I very much welcome the Bill, but does the Minister understand the disappointment of those who believe that the Church of England is not being given the choice accorded to other faiths to marry same-sex couples if they so choose and that far from being forced to marry same-sex couples, the Church of England is being forced not to marry them, even if some elements would like to do so?”

Your views

Debbie Gankerseer, 44, Hurstpierpoint. “I was surprised that they went for it because of all the negative spin, but I’m very pleased about it.”

Kelly Fricker, 34, Goodwood Way, Moulsecoomb, Brighton. “I think it’s up to them and I don’t think it should matter. I’m not really surprised.”

Graham Pettit, 61, Denton Drive, Brighton. “Each to their own. I’m not surprised by the news.”

Helen Minshull, 39, Burgess Hill. “I think it is long overdue. I have got gay friends and if you can adopt children, you should be able to get married as well. I think it is a really out-dated view that it hasn’t been done before now.”

Bryan Childs, 57, Hollingbury, Brighton “I have gay friends and I’m bisexual, so I agree with the decision.”

I really do wish The Argos would stop bigging up any piece of news for the benefit of its readers. The basics of this article are just not true! Brighton is not the worlds biggest and best gay scene as is so often claimed. It is popular with gay folk for weekends but it most certainly is not on the world circuit party cities like London, New York, Manchester etc. Brighton has a transient gay population. Some move there for short term work or to use the medical services but often move on. This myth is now being believed by gay folk who are fully resident in the city and constantly being reiterated by the same. Brighton has a good Pride event but that is about it but it is not, and I do not think it ever will be the Gay capital of anything. Tell the truth.

I really do wish The Argos would stop bigging up any piece of news for the benefit of its readers. The basics of this article are just not true! Brighton is not the worlds biggest and best gay scene as is so often claimed. It is popular with gay folk for weekends but it most certainly is not on the world circuit party cities like London, New York, Manchester etc. Brighton has a transient gay population. Some move there for short term work or to use the medical services but often move on. This myth is now being believed by gay folk who are fully resident in the city and constantly being reiterated by the same. Brighton has a good Pride event but that is about it but it is not, and I do not think it ever will be the Gay capital of anything. Tell the truth.spuddah

spuddah wrote:
I really do wish The Argos would stop bigging up any piece of news for the benefit of its readers. The basics of this article are just not true! Brighton is not the worlds biggest and best gay scene as is so often claimed. It is popular with gay folk for weekends but it most certainly is not on the world circuit party cities like London, New York, Manchester etc. Brighton has a transient gay population. Some move there for short term work or to use the medical services but often move on. This myth is now being believed by gay folk who are fully resident in the city and constantly being reiterated by the same. Brighton has a good Pride event but that is about it but it is not, and I do not think it ever will be the Gay capital of anything. Tell the truth.

So you're saying that the city's newspaper, its local MPs, the local authority and the gay community are all wrong when they refer to their city as a major part of the international scene. Whose opinion IS valid on this matter, then?

[quote][p][bold]spuddah[/bold] wrote:
I really do wish The Argos would stop bigging up any piece of news for the benefit of its readers. The basics of this article are just not true! Brighton is not the worlds biggest and best gay scene as is so often claimed. It is popular with gay folk for weekends but it most certainly is not on the world circuit party cities like London, New York, Manchester etc. Brighton has a transient gay population. Some move there for short term work or to use the medical services but often move on. This myth is now being believed by gay folk who are fully resident in the city and constantly being reiterated by the same. Brighton has a good Pride event but that is about it but it is not, and I do not think it ever will be the Gay capital of anything. Tell the truth.[/p][/quote]So you're saying that the city's newspaper, its local MPs, the local authority and the gay community are all wrong when they refer to their city as a major part of the international scene. Whose opinion IS valid on this matter, then?Roundbill

Great news all round. And, although it pains me to say it, well done to Cameron for pushing it through against significant opposition from the more antediluvian elements in his party. Certainly better social legislation than Labour managed.

Great news all round. And, although it pains me to say it, well done to Cameron for pushing it through against significant opposition from the more antediluvian elements in his party. Certainly better social legislation than Labour managed.Jimmy Stewart's Imaginary Rabbit

Jimmy Stewart's Imaginary Rabbit wrote:
Great news all round. And, although it pains me to say it, well done to Cameron for pushing it through against significant opposition from the more antediluvian elements in his party. Certainly better social legislation than Labour managed.

Gay marriage has been the major headline in the press for several days. I do not for one moment believe that Cameron is really concerned one way or another. All the tub thumping has probably been used to cover up some bad news. That being said, I actually think the vote was a good result. Providing people get married for the right reasons and are fully committed to one another, then gender should not be an issue. The same goes for gay couples adopting children. Providing the home is a loving and safe environment, surely this is better than a child spending their childhood in a care home.

[quote][p][bold]Jimmy Stewart's Imaginary Rabbit[/bold] wrote:
Great news all round. And, although it pains me to say it, well done to Cameron for pushing it through against significant opposition from the more antediluvian elements in his party. Certainly better social legislation than Labour managed.[/p][/quote]Gay marriage has been the major headline in the press for several days. I do not for one moment believe that Cameron is really concerned one way or another. All the tub thumping has probably been used to cover up some bad news. That being said, I actually think the vote was a good result. Providing people get married for the right reasons and are fully committed to one another, then gender should not be an issue. The same goes for gay couples adopting children. Providing the home is a loving and safe environment, surely this is better than a child spending their childhood in a care home.Serf

Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.

Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.just-a-person

If I were to write what I am thinking, I would only get deleted and banned.

Suffice to remind readers and Councillors that the bill has only had its second reading and there is a long way to go yet before it passes into law.

If I were to write what I am thinking, I would only get deleted and banned.
Suffice to remind readers and Councillors that the bill has only had its second reading and there is a long way to go yet before it passes into law.Beethoven

spuddah wrote: I really do wish The Argos would stop bigging up any piece of news for the benefit of its readers. The basics of this article are just not true! Brighton is not the worlds biggest and best gay scene as is so often claimed. It is popular with gay folk for weekends but it most certainly is not on the world circuit party cities like London, New York, Manchester etc. Brighton has a transient gay population. Some move there for short term work or to use the medical services but often move on. This myth is now being believed by gay folk who are fully resident in the city and constantly being reiterated by the same. Brighton has a good Pride event but that is about it but it is not, and I do not think it ever will be the Gay capital of anything. Tell the truth.

So you're saying that the city's newspaper, its local MPs, the local authority and the gay community are all wrong when they refer to their city as a major part of the international scene. Whose opinion IS valid on this matter, then?

The Brighton gay community as any gay community are very very good at self publicity. The same goes for local newspapers and in particular MPs and the local authority. Dont believe everything they tell you because most of it is based on made up statistics and downright lies. I am only trying to put the facts as they actually are. I am gay myself but I am a realist.

[quote][p][bold]Roundbill[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]spuddah[/bold] wrote: I really do wish The Argos would stop bigging up any piece of news for the benefit of its readers. The basics of this article are just not true! Brighton is not the worlds biggest and best gay scene as is so often claimed. It is popular with gay folk for weekends but it most certainly is not on the world circuit party cities like London, New York, Manchester etc. Brighton has a transient gay population. Some move there for short term work or to use the medical services but often move on. This myth is now being believed by gay folk who are fully resident in the city and constantly being reiterated by the same. Brighton has a good Pride event but that is about it but it is not, and I do not think it ever will be the Gay capital of anything. Tell the truth.[/p][/quote]So you're saying that the city's newspaper, its local MPs, the local authority and the gay community are all wrong when they refer to their city as a major part of the international scene. Whose opinion IS valid on this matter, then?[/p][/quote]The Brighton gay community as any gay community are very very good at self publicity. The same goes for local newspapers and in particular MPs and the local authority. Dont believe everything they tell you because most of it is based on made up statistics and downright lies. I am only trying to put the facts as they actually are. I am gay myself but I am a realist.spuddah

just-a-person wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.

[quote][p][bold]just-a-person[/bold] wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.[/p][/quote]your post really made me laugh, and I'm a gay man!
... the answer's NO! ;-)Take it Personally

just-a-person wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.

Thank you top post.I feel the same but will now be told im homophobic.Anyway the Tories now have the gay vote thats for sure.But they knew that.As we know from the small bit on the news last night what they liked to get upto with young boys in the 80s.They talk so much about family life but do all they can to bring it down.

[quote][p][bold]just-a-person[/bold] wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.[/p][/quote]Thank you top post.I feel the same but will now be told im homophobic.Anyway the Tories now have the gay vote thats for sure.But they knew that.As we know from the small bit on the news last night what they liked to get upto with young boys in the 80s.They talk so much about family life but do all they can to bring it down.Freeloaders

just-a-person wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.

Thank you top post.I feel the same but will now be told im homophobic.Anyway the Tories now have the gay vote thats for sure.But they knew that.As we know from the small bit on the news last night what they liked to get upto with young boys in the 80s.They talk so much about family life but do all they can to bring it down.

It seems that you are linking homosexuality with paedophilia. A gay man is no more likely to sexually molest a young boy than a hetrosexual man is to molest a young girl.

I would find some things about Pride offensive, but I do have the choice of going or staying away. I choose the later.

[quote][p][bold]Freeloaders[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]just-a-person[/bold] wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.[/p][/quote]Thank you top post.I feel the same but will now be told im homophobic.Anyway the Tories now have the gay vote thats for sure.But they knew that.As we know from the small bit on the news last night what they liked to get upto with young boys in the 80s.They talk so much about family life but do all they can to bring it down.[/p][/quote]It seems that you are linking homosexuality with paedophilia. A gay man is no more likely to sexually molest a young boy than a hetrosexual man is to molest a young girl.
I would find some things about Pride offensive, but I do have the choice of going or staying away. I choose the later.Serf

lordenglandofsussex wrote:
Does this mean that Mosques and Synagogues must marry gay people by law? Notice the MP for Crawley voted against. I wonder why?

Isn't rabbi Lionel Blue gay? So it probably isn't a problem. I don't see what the problem is

[quote][p][bold]lordenglandofsussex[/bold] wrote:
Does this mean that Mosques and Synagogues must marry gay people by law? Notice the MP for Crawley voted against. I wonder why?[/p][/quote]Isn't rabbi Lionel Blue gay? So it probably isn't a problem. I don't see what the problem isgeorge smith

just-a-person wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.

Totall agree,if a strait person walked around town as some of these do at any other time other than Gay pride week we would be arrested for gross indecency

[quote][p][bold]just-a-person[/bold] wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.[/p][/quote]Totall agree,if a strait person walked around town as some of these do at any other time other than Gay pride week we would be arrested for gross indecencyPETE OF QUEENS PARK

just-a-person wrote: Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.

Thank you top post.I feel the same but will now be told im homophobic.Anyway the Tories now have the gay vote thats for sure.But they knew that.As we know from the small bit on the news last night what they liked to get upto with young boys in the 80s.They talk so much about family life but do all they can to bring it down.

The 'gay vote' - LOL This is same party where more than half that party's MPs voted against the bill. Not fecking likely - I'm one gay man who certainly won't be voting Tory, ditto my partner and my immediate circle. We can't be bribed into voting because another small step towards equality was taken. A member of the cabinet is one record as refering to gay men as 'botties' - same old toxic party it ever was!

[quote][p][bold]Freeloaders[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]just-a-person[/bold] wrote: Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.[/p][/quote]Thank you top post.I feel the same but will now be told im homophobic.Anyway the Tories now have the gay vote thats for sure.But they knew that.As we know from the small bit on the news last night what they liked to get upto with young boys in the 80s.They talk so much about family life but do all they can to bring it down.[/p][/quote]The 'gay vote' - LOL This is same party where more than half that party's MPs voted against the bill. Not fecking likely - I'm one gay man who certainly won't be voting Tory, ditto my partner and my immediate circle. We can't be bribed into voting because another small step towards equality was taken. A member of the cabinet is one record as refering to gay men as 'botties' - same old toxic party it ever was!RickH

MARRIAGE IS FOR CHRISTIANS! IF YOUR GAY....YOUR CERTAINLY NOT CHRISTIAN....!!!! Isn't civil partnership enough??? If one of you pass atleast the other still gets what you have! It's morally wrong for gay people to marry!

MARRIAGE IS FOR CHRISTIANS! IF YOUR GAY....YOUR CERTAINLY NOT CHRISTIAN....!!!! Isn't civil partnership enough??? If one of you pass atleast the other still gets what you have! It's morally wrong for gay people to marry!ArgusReader100

ArgusReader100 wrote:
MARRIAGE IS FOR CHRISTIANS! IF YOUR GAY....YOUR CERTAINLY NOT CHRISTIAN....!!!! Isn't civil partnership enough??? If one of you pass atleast the other still gets what you have! It's morally wrong for gay people to marry!

That's lovely dear, now draw a nice picture of a doggy.

[quote][p][bold]ArgusReader100[/bold] wrote:
MARRIAGE IS FOR CHRISTIANS! IF YOUR GAY....YOUR CERTAINLY NOT CHRISTIAN....!!!! Isn't civil partnership enough??? If one of you pass atleast the other still gets what you have! It's morally wrong for gay people to marry![/p][/quote]That's lovely dear, now draw a nice picture of a doggy.Nitrous_McBread

ArgusReader100 wrote: MARRIAGE IS FOR CHRISTIANS! IF YOUR GAY....YOUR CERTAINLY NOT CHRISTIAN....!!!! Isn't civil partnership enough??? If one of you pass atleast the other still gets what you have! It's morally wrong for gay people to marry!

That's lovely dear, now draw a nice picture of a doggy.

don't worry,the catholic church won't accept this,nor will the rest of the world,which is why it makes the issue ridiculous,marriage is a worldwide thing,gay marriage won't be accepted worldwide

[quote][p][bold]Nitrous_McBread[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ArgusReader100[/bold] wrote: MARRIAGE IS FOR CHRISTIANS! IF YOUR GAY....YOUR CERTAINLY NOT CHRISTIAN....!!!! Isn't civil partnership enough??? If one of you pass atleast the other still gets what you have! It's morally wrong for gay people to marry![/p][/quote]That's lovely dear, now draw a nice picture of a doggy.[/p][/quote]don't worry,the catholic church won't accept this,nor will the rest of the world,which is why it makes the issue ridiculous,marriage is a worldwide thing,gay marriage won't be accepted worldwidebluemonday

ArgusReader100 wrote: MARRIAGE IS FOR CHRISTIANS! IF YOUR GAY....YOUR CERTAINLY NOT CHRISTIAN....!!!! Isn't civil partnership enough??? If one of you pass atleast the other still gets what you have! It's morally wrong for gay people to marry!

That's lovely dear, now draw a nice picture of a doggy.

don't worry,the catholic church won't accept this,nor will the rest of the world,which is why it makes the issue ridiculous,marriage is a worldwide thing,gay marriage won't be accepted worldwide

Yeah, this'll never be accepted by the Catholic church, that great arbiter of morality (apart from the bit where they tortured and burnt thousands of people who didn't agree with them to death. And ignored the Nazi genocide. And imprisoned Irish women in forced labour camps. And contributed to the spread of African HIV by spreading lies about condoms. And forcibly raped thousands of little boys and girls supposedly in their care and helped the paedophile rapists evade justice.)

And no, equal marriage will never be accepted worldwide (at least not in those countries where 4% of humans aren't naturally attracted to their own sex.... um, remind me, what are those countries again?)

[quote][p][bold]bluemonday[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Nitrous_McBread[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ArgusReader100[/bold] wrote: MARRIAGE IS FOR CHRISTIANS! IF YOUR GAY....YOUR CERTAINLY NOT CHRISTIAN....!!!! Isn't civil partnership enough??? If one of you pass atleast the other still gets what you have! It's morally wrong for gay people to marry![/p][/quote]That's lovely dear, now draw a nice picture of a doggy.[/p][/quote]don't worry,the catholic church won't accept this,nor will the rest of the world,which is why it makes the issue ridiculous,marriage is a worldwide thing,gay marriage won't be accepted worldwide[/p][/quote]Yeah, this'll never be accepted by the Catholic church, that great arbiter of morality (apart from the bit where they tortured and burnt thousands of people who didn't agree with them to death. And ignored the Nazi genocide. And imprisoned Irish women in forced labour camps. And contributed to the spread of African HIV by spreading lies about condoms. And forcibly raped thousands of little boys and girls supposedly in their care and helped the paedophile rapists evade justice.)
And no, equal marriage will never be accepted worldwide (at least not in those countries where 4% of humans aren't naturally attracted to their own sex.... um, remind me, what are those countries again?)Nitrous_McBread

Sussex jim wrote:
Which surname do a same sex couple use when they are married?

Hopefully they will once again break the mould and keep their own names, as indeed happens in many other countries.

[quote][p][bold]Sussex jim[/bold] wrote:
Which surname do a same sex couple use when they are married?[/p][/quote]Hopefully they will once again break the mould and keep their own names, as indeed happens in many other countries.Old Ladys Gin

just-a-person wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.

[quote][p][bold]just-a-person[/bold] wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.[/p][/quote]i personally object to public money going towards funding the 'Panty Brats Gay Formation Dance Team'BornInBrighton1968

This vote is, of course, excellent news. Those who think it isn't really don't have a place in a friendly society.

If anything, this will increase the attendance and scope of Pride. I love the way people state how much Pride looks awful as if someone stuck a gun to their head and forced them to attend.

Talk about standing in the path of the outraged misery juggernaut...

This vote is, of course, excellent news. Those who think it isn't really don't have a place in a friendly society.
If anything, this will increase the attendance and scope of Pride. I love the way people state how much Pride looks awful as if someone stuck a gun to their head and forced them to attend.
Talk about standing in the path of the outraged misery juggernaut...Smartbloke

just-a-person wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.

Do you have any evidence that public money goes towards this kind of thing? Or like many Argus Comments Section contributors, you're using your bigotry - and it is bigotry in this instance - to make facts up.

You can always go and live in Crawley; their MP will welcome you with open legs. You'd get on like a caravan on fire.

[quote][p][bold]BornInBrighton1968[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]just-a-person[/bold] wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.[/p][/quote]i personally object to public money going towards funding the 'Panty Brats Gay Formation Dance Team'[/p][/quote]Do you have any evidence that public money goes towards this kind of thing? Or like many Argus Comments Section contributors, you're using your bigotry - and it is bigotry in this instance - to make facts up.
You can always go and live in Crawley; their MP will welcome you with open legs. You'd get on like a caravan on fire.Smartbloke

Would some one please tell my why homosexuals and lesbians are simply not refered to as such and not as gay. This word has been hijacked from its true meaning.
The homosexual and lesbian communities had civil partnership rights that is not allowed for hetrosexuals they can only achieve the same advantages civiil partnerships gave by getting married, so as has been mentioned above, it is they that are now discriminated against. If homosexuals and lesbians support equal rights they should be fighting to get hetrosexuals equality, of course they will not bother..

Would some one please tell my why homosexuals and lesbians are simply not refered to as such and not as gay. This word has been hijacked from its true meaning.
The homosexual and lesbian communities had civil partnership rights that is not allowed for hetrosexuals they can only achieve the same advantages civiil partnerships gave by getting married, so as has been mentioned above, it is they that are now discriminated against. If homosexuals and lesbians support equal rights they should be fighting to get hetrosexuals equality, of course they will not bother..stir up

just-a-person wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.

Do you have any evidence that public money goes towards this kind of thing? Or like many Argus Comments Section contributors, you're using your bigotry - and it is bigotry in this instance - to make facts up.

You can always go and live in Crawley; their MP will welcome you with open legs. You'd get on like a caravan on fire.

I am not a bigot; I have gay friends, a gay couple as neighbours and gay work colleagues. I fully support a gay persons right to marry the person that they love. I am also extremely proud to have been born in a city that is so diverse and tolerant.

I just don't want public money being spent on the 'Panty Brats Gay Formation Dance-Team'

[quote][p][bold]Smartbloke[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]BornInBrighton1968[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]just-a-person[/bold] wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.[/p][/quote]i personally object to public money going towards funding the 'Panty Brats Gay Formation Dance Team'[/p][/quote]Do you have any evidence that public money goes towards this kind of thing? Or like many Argus Comments Section contributors, you're using your bigotry - and it is bigotry in this instance - to make facts up.
You can always go and live in Crawley; their MP will welcome you with open legs. You'd get on like a caravan on fire.[/p][/quote]I am not a bigot; I have gay friends, a gay couple as neighbours and gay work colleagues. I fully support a gay persons right to marry the person that they love. I am also extremely proud to have been born in a city that is so diverse and tolerant.
I just don't want public money being spent on the 'Panty Brats Gay Formation Dance-Team'BornInBrighton1968

ArgusReader100 wrote: MARRIAGE IS FOR CHRISTIANS! IF YOUR GAY....YOUR CERTAINLY NOT CHRISTIAN....!!!! Isn't civil partnership enough??? If one of you pass atleast the other still gets what you have! It's morally wrong for gay people to marry!

That's lovely dear, now draw a nice picture of a doggy.

don't worry,the catholic church won't accept this,nor will the rest of the world,which is why it makes the issue ridiculous,marriage is a worldwide thing,gay marriage won't be accepted worldwide

Yeah, this'll never be accepted by the Catholic church, that great arbiter of morality (apart from the bit where they tortured and burnt thousands of people who didn't agree with them to death. And ignored the Nazi genocide. And imprisoned Irish women in forced labour camps. And contributed to the spread of African HIV by spreading lies about condoms. And forcibly raped thousands of little boys and girls supposedly in their care and helped the paedophile rapists evade justice.)

And no, equal marriage will never be accepted worldwide (at least not in those countries where 4% of humans aren't naturally attracted to their own sex.... um, remind me, what are those countries again?)

@ ArgusReader100 "Marriage is for Christians".

Other than the fact that marriage is a union between two persons in Judaism, Islam, Atheism...Your argument is already flawed.

Before you start "gay bashing" lets see how much of the bible you live by.

“Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak”-- 1 Corinthians 14:34

A raped, unengaged virgin must marry her rapist and they can never divorce (Deuteronomy 22:28-29).

Eating pork is forbidden (Deuteronomy 14:8).

Before you pass on your bigoted views please make sure you live by all the bible rather than just the parts that suit.

I am a Hetrosexual male and honestly can't see what the problem is with gay marriage. I don't intend to marry another male so the issue doesn't affect me in the slightest.

And the persons argument earlier confusing paedophillia with homosexuality....Pri
celess.

[quote][p][bold]Nitrous_McBread[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]bluemonday[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Nitrous_McBread[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ArgusReader100[/bold] wrote: MARRIAGE IS FOR CHRISTIANS! IF YOUR GAY....YOUR CERTAINLY NOT CHRISTIAN....!!!! Isn't civil partnership enough??? If one of you pass atleast the other still gets what you have! It's morally wrong for gay people to marry![/p][/quote]That's lovely dear, now draw a nice picture of a doggy.[/p][/quote]don't worry,the catholic church won't accept this,nor will the rest of the world,which is why it makes the issue ridiculous,marriage is a worldwide thing,gay marriage won't be accepted worldwide[/p][/quote]Yeah, this'll never be accepted by the Catholic church, that great arbiter of morality (apart from the bit where they tortured and burnt thousands of people who didn't agree with them to death. And ignored the Nazi genocide. And imprisoned Irish women in forced labour camps. And contributed to the spread of African HIV by spreading lies about condoms. And forcibly raped thousands of little boys and girls supposedly in their care and helped the paedophile rapists evade justice.)
And no, equal marriage will never be accepted worldwide (at least not in those countries where 4% of humans aren't naturally attracted to their own sex.... um, remind me, what are those countries again?)[/p][/quote]@ ArgusReader100 "Marriage is for Christians".
Other than the fact that marriage is a union between two persons in Judaism, Islam, Atheism...Your argument is already flawed.
Before you start "gay bashing" lets see how much of the bible you live by.
“Whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery” (Matthew 5:32, 19:9 & Luke 16:18).
“Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak”-- 1 Corinthians 14:34
A raped, unengaged virgin must marry her rapist and they can never divorce (Deuteronomy 22:28-29).
Eating pork is forbidden (Deuteronomy 14:8).
Before you pass on your bigoted views please make sure you live by all the bible rather than just the parts that suit.
I am a Hetrosexual male and honestly can't see what the problem is with gay marriage. I don't intend to marry another male so the issue doesn't affect me in the slightest.
And the persons argument earlier confusing paedophillia with homosexuality....Pri
celess.Mr. Mann.

just-a-person wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.

If you had posted your message about this harmless activity (which is not funded by BHCC, by the way) as a standalone comment rather than attaching it to a quote from 'just-a -person' who wants to ban Pride outright, your intentions would have been clearer.

[quote][p][bold]BornInBrighton1968[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]just-a-person[/bold] wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.[/p][/quote]i personally object to public money going towards funding the 'Panty Brats Gay Formation Dance Team'[/p][/quote]If you had posted your message about this harmless activity (which is not funded by BHCC, by the way) as a standalone comment rather than attaching it to a quote from 'just-a -person' who wants to ban Pride outright, your intentions would have been clearer.keeshond8

just-a-person wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.

If you had posted your message about this harmless activity (which is not funded by BHCC, by the way) as a standalone comment rather than attaching it to a quote from 'just-a -person' who wants to ban Pride outright, your intentions would have been clearer.

I see your point; thanks for pointing that out. Cheers.

[quote][p][bold]keeshond8[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]BornInBrighton1968[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]just-a-person[/bold] wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.[/p][/quote]i personally object to public money going towards funding the 'Panty Brats Gay Formation Dance Team'[/p][/quote]If you had posted your message about this harmless activity (which is not funded by BHCC, by the way) as a standalone comment rather than attaching it to a quote from 'just-a -person' who wants to ban Pride outright, your intentions would have been clearer.[/p][/quote]I see your point; thanks for pointing that out. Cheers.BornInBrighton1968

just-a-person wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.

Thank you top post.I feel the same but will now be told im homophobic.Anyway the Tories now have the gay vote thats for sure.But they knew that.As we know from the small bit on the news last night what they liked to get upto with young boys in the 80s.They talk so much about family life but do all they can to bring it down.

It seems that you are linking homosexuality with paedophilia. A gay man is no more likely to sexually molest a young boy than a hetrosexual man is to molest a young girl.

I would find some things about Pride offensive, but I do have the choice of going or staying away. I choose the later.

I was not linking homosexuality with paedophilia.I was trying to make a point about that vile Tory party.They have been going on about the family since God knows when.But now thanks to the press we really know what those sick animals were really upto in the 70s & 80s.Like we all know most of them maybe married,but that really does mean very little as we have all seen in the press over the years.

[quote][p][bold]Serf[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Freeloaders[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]just-a-person[/bold] wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.[/p][/quote]Thank you top post.I feel the same but will now be told im homophobic.Anyway the Tories now have the gay vote thats for sure.But they knew that.As we know from the small bit on the news last night what they liked to get upto with young boys in the 80s.They talk so much about family life but do all they can to bring it down.[/p][/quote]It seems that you are linking homosexuality with paedophilia. A gay man is no more likely to sexually molest a young boy than a hetrosexual man is to molest a young girl.
I would find some things about Pride offensive, but I do have the choice of going or staying away. I choose the later.[/p][/quote]I was not linking homosexuality with paedophilia.I was trying to make a point about that vile Tory party.They have been going on about the family since God knows when.But now thanks to the press we really know what those sick animals were really upto in the 70s & 80s.Like we all know most of them maybe married,but that really does mean very little as we have all seen in the press over the years.Freeloaders

Agree about scrapping PRIDE. None of the gay people I know have any respect for it anymore, and dont even recognise what it has become.

It is disgraceful to have this debacle on our streets. Nudity and sex shoved in the faces of inhabitants (often young kids!) just going about their business.

Tell me how toning that down hurts the gay community????!!!!

Gays have now won this latest concession, and rightly so...

...so how about fairness and equality the other way - lets either scrap PRIDE, or make it actually SAY something useful, NOT a travelling sex / stripper show

Agree about scrapping PRIDE. None of the gay people I know have any respect for it anymore, and dont even recognise what it has become.
It is disgraceful to have this debacle on our streets. Nudity and sex shoved in the faces of inhabitants (often young kids!) just going about their business.
Tell me how toning that down hurts the gay community????!!!!
Gays have now won this latest concession, and rightly so...
...so how about fairness and equality the other way - lets either scrap PRIDE, or make it actually SAY something useful, NOT a travelling sex / stripper showwhereisthe...?

If two people wish to commit to each other through marriage, whatever their sexual orientation, then good luck them.

It is also great news that so many people want to get married in B&H, this should make us proud of the city. I hope that those people that do come to Brighton to get married receive a warm welcome and have a fantastic time.

If two people wish to commit to each other through marriage, whatever their sexual orientation, then good luck them.
It is also great news that so many people want to get married in B&H, this should make us proud of the city. I hope that those people that do come to Brighton to get married receive a warm welcome and have a fantastic time.HJarrs

whereisthe...? wrote:
Agree about scrapping PRIDE. None of the gay people I know have any respect for it anymore, and dont even recognise what it has become.

It is disgraceful to have this debacle on our streets. Nudity and sex shoved in the faces of inhabitants (often young kids!) just going about their business.

Tell me how toning that down hurts the gay community????!!!!

Gays have now won this latest concession, and rightly so...

...so how about fairness and equality the other way - lets either scrap PRIDE, or make it actually SAY something useful, NOT a travelling sex / stripper show

"Nudity and sex shoved in the faces of inhabitants..."!!! Where does this happen? I've been going for years and no-one's shoved anything in my face. Feeling a bit left out now :-(

[quote][p][bold]whereisthe...?[/bold] wrote:
Agree about scrapping PRIDE. None of the gay people I know have any respect for it anymore, and dont even recognise what it has become.
It is disgraceful to have this debacle on our streets. Nudity and sex shoved in the faces of inhabitants (often young kids!) just going about their business.
Tell me how toning that down hurts the gay community????!!!!
Gays have now won this latest concession, and rightly so...
...so how about fairness and equality the other way - lets either scrap PRIDE, or make it actually SAY something useful, NOT a travelling sex / stripper show[/p][/quote]"Nudity and sex shoved in the faces of inhabitants..."!!! Where does this happen? I've been going for years and no-one's shoved anything in my face. Feeling a bit left out now :-(High Wire

just-a-person wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.

Thank you top post.I feel the same but will now be told im homophobic.Anyway the Tories now have the gay vote thats for sure.But they knew that.As we know from the small bit on the news last night what they liked to get upto with young boys in the 80s.They talk so much about family life but do all they can to bring it down.

It seems that you are linking homosexuality with paedophilia. A gay man is no more likely to sexually molest a young boy than a hetrosexual man is to molest a young girl.

I would find some things about Pride offensive, but I do have the choice of going or staying away. I choose the later.

I was not linking homosexuality with paedophilia.I was trying to make a point about that vile Tory party.They have been going on about the family since God knows when.But now thanks to the press we really know what those sick animals were really upto in the 70s &amp; 80s.Like we all know most of them maybe married,but that really does mean very little as we have all seen in the press over the years.

The press are way behind on this. If they eventually catch up with what "amateurs" have uncovered in the past few months, the extent of it and the names of the people who were and still are involved, and the lengths that they have gone to to keep it covered up will make your hair curl. You'll never look at a New Year's Honours list in the same way again.

[quote][p][bold]Freeloaders[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Serf[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Freeloaders[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]just-a-person[/bold] wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.[/p][/quote]Thank you top post.I feel the same but will now be told im homophobic.Anyway the Tories now have the gay vote thats for sure.But they knew that.As we know from the small bit on the news last night what they liked to get upto with young boys in the 80s.They talk so much about family life but do all they can to bring it down.[/p][/quote]It seems that you are linking homosexuality with paedophilia. A gay man is no more likely to sexually molest a young boy than a hetrosexual man is to molest a young girl.
I would find some things about Pride offensive, but I do have the choice of going or staying away. I choose the later.[/p][/quote]I was not linking homosexuality with paedophilia.I was trying to make a point about that vile Tory party.They have been going on about the family since God knows when.But now thanks to the press we really know what those sick animals were really upto in the 70s & 80s.Like we all know most of them maybe married,but that really does mean very little as we have all seen in the press over the years.[/p][/quote]The press are way behind on this. If they eventually catch up with what "amateurs" have uncovered in the past few months, the extent of it and the names of the people who were and still are involved, and the lengths that they have gone to to keep it covered up will make your hair curl. You'll never look at a New Year's Honours list in the same way again.PorkBoat

ArgusReader100 wrote: MARRIAGE IS FOR CHRISTIANS! IF YOUR GAY....YOUR CERTAINLY NOT CHRISTIAN....!!!! Isn't civil partnership enough??? If one of you pass atleast the other still gets what you have! It's morally wrong for gay people to marry!

That's lovely dear, now draw a nice picture of a doggy.

don't worry,the catholic church won't accept this,nor will the rest of the world,which is why it makes the issue ridiculous,marriage is a worldwide thing,gay marriage won't be accepted worldwide

Yeah, this'll never be accepted by the Catholic church, that great arbiter of morality (apart from the bit where they tortured and burnt thousands of people who didn't agree with them to death. And ignored the Nazi genocide. And imprisoned Irish women in forced labour camps. And contributed to the spread of African HIV by spreading lies about condoms. And forcibly raped thousands of little boys and girls supposedly in their care and helped the paedophile rapists evade justice.)

And no, equal marriage will never be accepted worldwide (at least not in those countries where 4% of humans aren't naturally attracted to their own sex.... um, remind me, what are those countries again?)

You mean like in Spain?

[quote][p][bold]Nitrous_McBread[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]bluemonday[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Nitrous_McBread[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ArgusReader100[/bold] wrote: MARRIAGE IS FOR CHRISTIANS! IF YOUR GAY....YOUR CERTAINLY NOT CHRISTIAN....!!!! Isn't civil partnership enough??? If one of you pass atleast the other still gets what you have! It's morally wrong for gay people to marry![/p][/quote]That's lovely dear, now draw a nice picture of a doggy.[/p][/quote]don't worry,the catholic church won't accept this,nor will the rest of the world,which is why it makes the issue ridiculous,marriage is a worldwide thing,gay marriage won't be accepted worldwide[/p][/quote]Yeah, this'll never be accepted by the Catholic church, that great arbiter of morality (apart from the bit where they tortured and burnt thousands of people who didn't agree with them to death. And ignored the Nazi genocide. And imprisoned Irish women in forced labour camps. And contributed to the spread of African HIV by spreading lies about condoms. And forcibly raped thousands of little boys and girls supposedly in their care and helped the paedophile rapists evade justice.)
And no, equal marriage will never be accepted worldwide (at least not in those countries where 4% of humans aren't naturally attracted to their own sex.... um, remind me, what are those countries again?)[/p][/quote]You mean like in Spain?Sweepster

ArgusReader100 wrote: MARRIAGE IS FOR CHRISTIANS! IF YOUR GAY....YOUR CERTAINLY NOT CHRISTIAN....!!!! Isn't civil partnership enough??? If one of you pass atleast the other still gets what you have! It's morally wrong for gay people to marry!

That's lovely dear, now draw a nice picture of a doggy.

don't worry,the catholic church won't accept this,nor will the rest of the world,which is why it makes the issue ridiculous,marriage is a worldwide thing,gay marriage won't be accepted worldwide

Yeah, this'll never be accepted by the Catholic church, that great arbiter of morality (apart from the bit where they tortured and burnt thousands of people who didn't agree with them to death. And ignored the Nazi genocide. And imprisoned Irish women in forced labour camps. And contributed to the spread of African HIV by spreading lies about condoms. And forcibly raped thousands of little boys and girls supposedly in their care and helped the paedophile rapists evade justice.)

And no, equal marriage will never be accepted worldwide (at least not in those countries where 4% of humans aren't naturally attracted to their own sex.... um, remind me, what are those countries again?)

@ ArgusReader100 &quot;Marriage is for Christians".

Other than the fact that marriage is a union between two persons in Judaism, Islam, Atheism...Your argument is already flawed.

Before you start "gay bashing" lets see how much of the bible you live by.

“Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak”-- 1 Corinthians 14:34

A raped, unengaged virgin must marry her rapist and they can never divorce (Deuteronomy 22:28-29).

Eating pork is forbidden (Deuteronomy 14:8).

Before you pass on your bigoted views please make sure you live by all the bible rather than just the parts that suit.

I am a Hetrosexual male and honestly can't see what the problem is with gay marriage. I don't intend to marry another male so the issue doesn't affect me in the slightest.

And the persons argument earlier confusing paedophillia with homosexuality....Pri

celess.

Interestingly, these 'christians' have not responded.

[quote][p][bold]Mr. Mann.[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Nitrous_McBread[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]bluemonday[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Nitrous_McBread[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ArgusReader100[/bold] wrote: MARRIAGE IS FOR CHRISTIANS! IF YOUR GAY....YOUR CERTAINLY NOT CHRISTIAN....!!!! Isn't civil partnership enough??? If one of you pass atleast the other still gets what you have! It's morally wrong for gay people to marry![/p][/quote]That's lovely dear, now draw a nice picture of a doggy.[/p][/quote]don't worry,the catholic church won't accept this,nor will the rest of the world,which is why it makes the issue ridiculous,marriage is a worldwide thing,gay marriage won't be accepted worldwide[/p][/quote]Yeah, this'll never be accepted by the Catholic church, that great arbiter of morality (apart from the bit where they tortured and burnt thousands of people who didn't agree with them to death. And ignored the Nazi genocide. And imprisoned Irish women in forced labour camps. And contributed to the spread of African HIV by spreading lies about condoms. And forcibly raped thousands of little boys and girls supposedly in their care and helped the paedophile rapists evade justice.)
And no, equal marriage will never be accepted worldwide (at least not in those countries where 4% of humans aren't naturally attracted to their own sex.... um, remind me, what are those countries again?)[/p][/quote]@ ArgusReader100 "Marriage is for Christians".
Other than the fact that marriage is a union between two persons in Judaism, Islam, Atheism...Your argument is already flawed.
Before you start "gay bashing" lets see how much of the bible you live by.
“Whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery” (Matthew 5:32, 19:9 & Luke 16:18).
“Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak”-- 1 Corinthians 14:34
A raped, unengaged virgin must marry her rapist and they can never divorce (Deuteronomy 22:28-29).
Eating pork is forbidden (Deuteronomy 14:8).
Before you pass on your bigoted views please make sure you live by all the bible rather than just the parts that suit.
I am a Hetrosexual male and honestly can't see what the problem is with gay marriage. I don't intend to marry another male so the issue doesn't affect me in the slightest.
And the persons argument earlier confusing paedophillia with homosexuality....Pri
celess.[/p][/quote]Interestingly, these 'christians' have not responded.Sweepster

ArgusReader100 wrote: MARRIAGE IS FOR CHRISTIANS! IF YOUR GAY....YOUR CERTAINLY NOT CHRISTIAN....!!!! Isn't civil partnership enough??? If one of you pass atleast the other still gets what you have! It's morally wrong for gay people to marry!

That's lovely dear, now draw a nice picture of a doggy.

don't worry,the catholic church won't accept this,nor will the rest of the world,which is why it makes the issue ridiculous,marriage is a worldwide thing,gay marriage won't be accepted worldwide

Yeah, this'll never be accepted by the Catholic church, that great arbiter of morality (apart from the bit where they tortured and burnt thousands of people who didn't agree with them to death. And ignored the Nazi genocide. And imprisoned Irish women in forced labour camps. And contributed to the spread of African HIV by spreading lies about condoms. And forcibly raped thousands of little boys and girls supposedly in their care and helped the paedophile rapists evade justice.)

And no, equal marriage will never be accepted worldwide (at least not in those countries where 4% of humans aren't naturally attracted to their own sex.... um, remind me, what are those countries again?)

@ ArgusReader100 &quot;Marriage is for Christians".

Other than the fact that marriage is a union between two persons in Judaism, Islam, Atheism...Your argument is already flawed.

Before you start "gay bashing" lets see how much of the bible you live by.

“Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak”-- 1 Corinthians 14:34

A raped, unengaged virgin must marry her rapist and they can never divorce (Deuteronomy 22:28-29).

Eating pork is forbidden (Deuteronomy 14:8).

Before you pass on your bigoted views please make sure you live by all the bible rather than just the parts that suit.

I am a Hetrosexual male and honestly can't see what the problem is with gay marriage. I don't intend to marry another male so the issue doesn't affect me in the slightest.

And the persons argument earlier confusing paedophillia with homosexuality....Pri

celess.

Interestingly, these 'christians' have not responded.

oh dear...now i know where 'drama queen' comes from lol hahahahahaha

[quote][p][bold]Sweepster[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Mr. Mann.[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Nitrous_McBread[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]bluemonday[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Nitrous_McBread[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ArgusReader100[/bold] wrote: MARRIAGE IS FOR CHRISTIANS! IF YOUR GAY....YOUR CERTAINLY NOT CHRISTIAN....!!!! Isn't civil partnership enough??? If one of you pass atleast the other still gets what you have! It's morally wrong for gay people to marry![/p][/quote]That's lovely dear, now draw a nice picture of a doggy.[/p][/quote]don't worry,the catholic church won't accept this,nor will the rest of the world,which is why it makes the issue ridiculous,marriage is a worldwide thing,gay marriage won't be accepted worldwide[/p][/quote]Yeah, this'll never be accepted by the Catholic church, that great arbiter of morality (apart from the bit where they tortured and burnt thousands of people who didn't agree with them to death. And ignored the Nazi genocide. And imprisoned Irish women in forced labour camps. And contributed to the spread of African HIV by spreading lies about condoms. And forcibly raped thousands of little boys and girls supposedly in their care and helped the paedophile rapists evade justice.)
And no, equal marriage will never be accepted worldwide (at least not in those countries where 4% of humans aren't naturally attracted to their own sex.... um, remind me, what are those countries again?)[/p][/quote]@ ArgusReader100 "Marriage is for Christians".
Other than the fact that marriage is a union between two persons in Judaism, Islam, Atheism...Your argument is already flawed.
Before you start "gay bashing" lets see how much of the bible you live by.
“Whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery” (Matthew 5:32, 19:9 & Luke 16:18).
“Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak”-- 1 Corinthians 14:34
A raped, unengaged virgin must marry her rapist and they can never divorce (Deuteronomy 22:28-29).
Eating pork is forbidden (Deuteronomy 14:8).
Before you pass on your bigoted views please make sure you live by all the bible rather than just the parts that suit.
I am a Hetrosexual male and honestly can't see what the problem is with gay marriage. I don't intend to marry another male so the issue doesn't affect me in the slightest.
And the persons argument earlier confusing paedophillia with homosexuality....Pri
celess.[/p][/quote]Interestingly, these 'christians' have not responded.[/p][/quote]oh dear...now i know where 'drama queen' comes from lol hahahahahahaloonileft

just-a-person wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.

Thank you top post.I feel the same but will now be told im homophobic.Anyway the Tories now have the gay vote thats for sure.But they knew that.As we know from the small bit on the news last night what they liked to get upto with young boys in the 80s.They talk so much about family life but do all they can to bring it down.

Shut up. Just shut up. Some people are gay - get over it. Some people go to Pride - get over it. Nobody forces you to go. Spread your hate somewhere else.

Shut up. Just shut up. I suspect you will die lonely.

[quote][p][bold]Freeloaders[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]just-a-person[/bold] wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.[/p][/quote]Thank you top post.I feel the same but will now be told im homophobic.Anyway the Tories now have the gay vote thats for sure.But they knew that.As we know from the small bit on the news last night what they liked to get upto with young boys in the 80s.They talk so much about family life but do all they can to bring it down.[/p][/quote]Shut up. Just shut up. Some people are gay - get over it. Some people go to Pride - get over it. Nobody forces you to go. Spread your hate somewhere else.
Shut up. Just shut up. I suspect you will die lonely.Lightbulb48

just-a-person wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.

Thank you top post.I feel the same but will now be told im homophobic.Anyway the Tories now have the gay vote thats for sure.But they knew that.As we know from the small bit on the news last night what they liked to get upto with young boys in the 80s.They talk so much about family life but do all they can to bring it down.

Shut up. Just shut up. Some people are gay - get over it. Some people go to Pride - get over it. Nobody forces you to go. Spread your hate somewhere else.

Shut up. Just shut up. I suspect you will die lonely.

Read the post from PorkBoat you silly person.Even gay people feel the same as a lot of the rest of us.But people like you have taken away their voice.Now more to the point your gay now get over it.Have your silly Pride thing.Have a party in the park,or in St,James street.But why do you need to close down the streets of the city for a full weekend now as you all run up and down the road with your cloths off.Lets be honest the law would not let it happen any other time of the year.But you people claim you don't wish to be treated as different lol.Please make your mind up.Like i say have your party in the park,but let familys with young children take their children out shopping like any other weekend without having to see that rubbish.If im right only about 20% of the city is gay,so that means you do not own the streets.Also like many gay people have said on here over the years they don't go anymore.Most of it is gay people from all over the country now,or straight people that are just looking for a reason to get off their faces on drugs.Wake up you sad person."People don't care if your gay in Wales,Manchester,or London.Its people like you that like to make a big deal out of it.Lets face you got all the best jobs on tv now lol.

[quote][p][bold]Lightbulb48[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Freeloaders[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]just-a-person[/bold] wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.[/p][/quote]Thank you top post.I feel the same but will now be told im homophobic.Anyway the Tories now have the gay vote thats for sure.But they knew that.As we know from the small bit on the news last night what they liked to get upto with young boys in the 80s.They talk so much about family life but do all they can to bring it down.[/p][/quote]Shut up. Just shut up. Some people are gay - get over it. Some people go to Pride - get over it. Nobody forces you to go. Spread your hate somewhere else.
Shut up. Just shut up. I suspect you will die lonely.[/p][/quote]Read the post from PorkBoat you silly person.Even gay people feel the same as a lot of the rest of us.But people like you have taken away their voice.Now more to the point your gay now get over it.Have your silly Pride thing.Have a party in the park,or in St,James street.But why do you need to close down the streets of the city for a full weekend now as you all run up and down the road with your cloths off.Lets be honest the law would not let it happen any other time of the year.But you people claim you don't wish to be treated as different lol.Please make your mind up.Like i say have your party in the park,but let familys with young children take their children out shopping like any other weekend without having to see that rubbish.If im right only about 20% of the city is gay,so that means you do not own the streets.Also like many gay people have said on here over the years they don't go anymore.Most of it is gay people from all over the country now,or straight people that are just looking for a reason to get off their faces on drugs.Wake up you sad person."People don't care if your gay in Wales,Manchester,or London.Its people like you that like to make a big deal out of it.Lets face you got all the best jobs on tv now lol.Freeloaders

just-a-person wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.

Thank you top post.I feel the same but will now be told im homophobic.Anyway the Tories now have the gay vote thats for sure.But they knew that.As we know from the small bit on the news last night what they liked to get upto with young boys in the 80s.They talk so much about family life but do all they can to bring it down.

Shut up. Just shut up. Some people are gay - get over it. Some people go to Pride - get over it. Nobody forces you to go. Spread your hate somewhere else.

Shut up. Just shut up. I suspect you will die lonely.

Read the post from PorkBoat you silly person.Even gay people feel the same as a lot of the rest of us.But people like you have taken away their voice.Now more to the point your gay now get over it.Have your silly Pride thing.Have a party in the park,or in St,James street.But why do you need to close down the streets of the city for a full weekend now as you all run up and down the road with your cloths off.Lets be honest the law would not let it happen any other time of the year.But you people claim you don't wish to be treated as different lol.Please make your mind up.Like i say have your party in the park,but let familys with young children take their children out shopping like any other weekend without having to see that rubbish.If im right only about 20% of the city is gay,so that means you do not own the streets.Also like many gay people have said on here over the years they don't go anymore.Most of it is gay people from all over the country now,or straight people that are just looking for a reason to get off their faces on drugs.Wake up you sad person.&quot;People don't care if your gay in Wales,Manchester,or London.Its people like you that like to make a big deal out of it.Lets face you got all the best jobs on tv now lol.

@ Freeloaders... Best to stay off the Special Brew that early in the afternoon. None of what you write makes any sense whatsoever - even PorkBoat said nothing to back up your 'arguments' (unless "slip your ring on my finger" or "ooh er" has some deeper meaning for you?).

[quote][p][bold]Freeloaders[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Lightbulb48[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Freeloaders[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]just-a-person[/bold] wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.[/p][/quote]Thank you top post.I feel the same but will now be told im homophobic.Anyway the Tories now have the gay vote thats for sure.But they knew that.As we know from the small bit on the news last night what they liked to get upto with young boys in the 80s.They talk so much about family life but do all they can to bring it down.[/p][/quote]Shut up. Just shut up. Some people are gay - get over it. Some people go to Pride - get over it. Nobody forces you to go. Spread your hate somewhere else.
Shut up. Just shut up. I suspect you will die lonely.[/p][/quote]Read the post from PorkBoat you silly person.Even gay people feel the same as a lot of the rest of us.But people like you have taken away their voice.Now more to the point your gay now get over it.Have your silly Pride thing.Have a party in the park,or in St,James street.But why do you need to close down the streets of the city for a full weekend now as you all run up and down the road with your cloths off.Lets be honest the law would not let it happen any other time of the year.But you people claim you don't wish to be treated as different lol.Please make your mind up.Like i say have your party in the park,but let familys with young children take their children out shopping like any other weekend without having to see that rubbish.If im right only about 20% of the city is gay,so that means you do not own the streets.Also like many gay people have said on here over the years they don't go anymore.Most of it is gay people from all over the country now,or straight people that are just looking for a reason to get off their faces on drugs.Wake up you sad person."People don't care if your gay in Wales,Manchester,or London.Its people like you that like to make a big deal out of it.Lets face you got all the best jobs on tv now lol.[/p][/quote]@ Freeloaders... Best to stay off the Special Brew that early in the afternoon. None of what you write makes any sense whatsoever - even PorkBoat said nothing to back up your 'arguments' (unless "slip your ring on my finger" or "ooh er" has some deeper meaning for you?).High Wire

just-a-person wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.

Thank you top post.I feel the same but will now be told im homophobic.Anyway the Tories now have the gay vote thats for sure.But they knew that.As we know from the small bit on the news last night what they liked to get upto with young boys in the 80s.They talk so much about family life but do all they can to bring it down.

Shut up. Just shut up. Some people are gay - get over it. Some people go to Pride - get over it. Nobody forces you to go. Spread your hate somewhere else.

Shut up. Just shut up. I suspect you will die lonely.

Read the post from PorkBoat you silly person.Even gay people feel the same as a lot of the rest of us.But people like you have taken away their voice.Now more to the point your gay now get over it.Have your silly Pride thing.Have a party in the park,or in St,James street.But why do you need to close down the streets of the city for a full weekend now as you all run up and down the road with your cloths off.Lets be honest the law would not let it happen any other time of the year.But you people claim you don't wish to be treated as different lol.Please make your mind up.Like i say have your party in the park,but let familys with young children take their children out shopping like any other weekend without having to see that rubbish.If im right only about 20% of the city is gay,so that means you do not own the streets.Also like many gay people have said on here over the years they don't go anymore.Most of it is gay people from all over the country now,or straight people that are just looking for a reason to get off their faces on drugs.Wake up you sad person.&quot;People don't care if your gay in Wales,Manchester,or London.Its people like you that like to make a big deal out of it.Lets face you got all the best jobs on tv now lol.

@ Freeloaders... Best to stay off the Special Brew that early in the afternoon. None of what you write makes any sense whatsoever - even PorkBoat said nothing to back up your 'arguments' (unless "slip your ring on my finger" or "ooh er" has some deeper meaning for you?).

LOL oh dear its all getting a bit bitchy now.Somoenes going to get their eyes scratched out hahahahahahahaha

[quote][p][bold]High Wire[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Freeloaders[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Lightbulb48[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Freeloaders[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]just-a-person[/bold] wrote:
Can we ban Pride now then ? I am not homophobic but seeing grown men walking round in nappies is not a pleasant sight and I fail to see the category that falls into other than hysterical and not a pretty sight.[/p][/quote]Thank you top post.I feel the same but will now be told im homophobic.Anyway the Tories now have the gay vote thats for sure.But they knew that.As we know from the small bit on the news last night what they liked to get upto with young boys in the 80s.They talk so much about family life but do all they can to bring it down.[/p][/quote]Shut up. Just shut up. Some people are gay - get over it. Some people go to Pride - get over it. Nobody forces you to go. Spread your hate somewhere else.
Shut up. Just shut up. I suspect you will die lonely.[/p][/quote]Read the post from PorkBoat you silly person.Even gay people feel the same as a lot of the rest of us.But people like you have taken away their voice.Now more to the point your gay now get over it.Have your silly Pride thing.Have a party in the park,or in St,James street.But why do you need to close down the streets of the city for a full weekend now as you all run up and down the road with your cloths off.Lets be honest the law would not let it happen any other time of the year.But you people claim you don't wish to be treated as different lol.Please make your mind up.Like i say have your party in the park,but let familys with young children take their children out shopping like any other weekend without having to see that rubbish.If im right only about 20% of the city is gay,so that means you do not own the streets.Also like many gay people have said on here over the years they don't go anymore.Most of it is gay people from all over the country now,or straight people that are just looking for a reason to get off their faces on drugs.Wake up you sad person."People don't care if your gay in Wales,Manchester,or London.Its people like you that like to make a big deal out of it.Lets face you got all the best jobs on tv now lol.[/p][/quote]@ Freeloaders... Best to stay off the Special Brew that early in the afternoon. None of what you write makes any sense whatsoever - even PorkBoat said nothing to back up your 'arguments' (unless "slip your ring on my finger" or "ooh er" has some deeper meaning for you?).[/p][/quote]LOL oh dear its all getting a bit bitchy now.Somoenes going to get their eyes scratched out hahahahahahahahaloonileft

Whilst I have nothing against 'vic' blessing gay couples in his church I do nevertheless object to the blessing being called marriage.
The words marrying and marriage are already spoken for by men and women walking the isle so may I suggest as an alternative same sex couples call their union queering and queerage?

Whilst I have nothing against 'vic' blessing gay couples in his church I do nevertheless object to the blessing being called marriage.
The words marrying and marriage are already spoken for by men and women walking the isle so may I suggest as an alternative same sex couples call their union queering and queerage?Nobleox

Nobleox wrote:
Whilst I have nothing against 'vic' blessing gay couples in his church I do nevertheless object to the blessing being called marriage.
The words marrying and marriage are already spoken for by men and women walking the isle so may I suggest as an alternative same sex couples call their union queering and queerage?

yes your right i think this could work

[quote][p][bold]Nobleox[/bold] wrote:
Whilst I have nothing against 'vic' blessing gay couples in his church I do nevertheless object to the blessing being called marriage.
The words marrying and marriage are already spoken for by men and women walking the isle so may I suggest as an alternative same sex couples call their union queering and queerage?[/p][/quote]yes your right i think this could workloonileft

Nobleox wrote:
Whilst I have nothing against 'vic' blessing gay couples in his church I do nevertheless object to the blessing being called marriage.
The words marrying and marriage are already spoken for by men and women walking the isle so may I suggest as an alternative same sex couples call their union queering and queerage?

yes your right i think this could work

I got queeried today to the sound of church bells. Sounds good to me Nobleox.

[quote][p][bold]loonileft[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Nobleox[/bold] wrote:
Whilst I have nothing against 'vic' blessing gay couples in his church I do nevertheless object to the blessing being called marriage.
The words marrying and marriage are already spoken for by men and women walking the isle so may I suggest as an alternative same sex couples call their union queering and queerage?[/p][/quote]yes your right i think this could work[/p][/quote]I got queeried today to the sound of church bells. Sounds good to me Nobleox.straightasadye

It is a shame that many people are unable to see further than their noses.

My niece had a civil ceremony and took the name of her partner.

Nobody else is bothered about it.

Religion is a waste of time anyways.

Pride is just another way for people to make money of out others at rip off prices so why waste time when there are better things to do?

Is Brighton still full of hypocrites?

It is a shame that many people are unable to see further than their noses.
My niece had a civil ceremony and took the name of her partner.
Nobody else is bothered about it.
Religion is a waste of time anyways.
Pride is just another way for people to make money of out others at rip off prices so why waste time when there are better things to do?
Is Brighton still full of hypocrites?Brighton Visitor

I agree --you will be able to get sick bags free of charge when entering Brighton ---rapidly becoming home of the weak & useless..and a magnet for weirdos....

[quote][p][bold]saraman[/bold] wrote:
Ugh, it makes my skin crawl.[/p][/quote]I agree --you will be able to get sick bags free of charge when entering Brighton ---rapidly becoming home of the weak & useless..and a magnet for weirdos....Gordonmuppet

Jimmy Stewart's Imaginary Rabbit wrote:
Great news all round. And, although it pains me to say it, well done to Cameron for pushing it through against significant opposition from the more antediluvian elements in his party. Certainly better social legislation than Labour managed.

Gay marriage has been the major headline in the press for several days. I do not for one moment believe that Cameron is really concerned one way or another. All the tub thumping has probably been used to cover up some bad news. That being said, I actually think the vote was a good result. Providing people get married for the right reasons and are fully committed to one another, then gender should not be an issue. The same goes for gay couples adopting children. Providing the home is a loving and safe environment, surely this is better than a child spending their childhood in a care home.

This makes me wonder, is the horse meat 'scandal' also another attempt to keep your mind occupied while bigger more important changes are being implemented?

[quote][p][bold]Serf[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Jimmy Stewart's Imaginary Rabbit[/bold] wrote:
Great news all round. And, although it pains me to say it, well done to Cameron for pushing it through against significant opposition from the more antediluvian elements in his party. Certainly better social legislation than Labour managed.[/p][/quote]Gay marriage has been the major headline in the press for several days. I do not for one moment believe that Cameron is really concerned one way or another. All the tub thumping has probably been used to cover up some bad news. That being said, I actually think the vote was a good result. Providing people get married for the right reasons and are fully committed to one another, then gender should not be an issue. The same goes for gay couples adopting children. Providing the home is a loving and safe environment, surely this is better than a child spending their childhood in a care home.[/p][/quote]This makes me wonder, is the horse meat 'scandal' also another attempt to keep your mind occupied while bigger more important changes are being implemented?Omnishambles_1

Fairfax Sakes wrote:
Homosexuals have a higher RELATIVE incidence of HIV and AID than heteroseuxuals. Thats just a medical fact. What do you make of that eh?

I would probably have to say that it has nothing to do with gay marriage. That's just an actual fact.

[quote][p][bold]Fairfax Sakes[/bold] wrote:
Homosexuals have a higher RELATIVE incidence of HIV and AID than heteroseuxuals. Thats just a medical fact. What do you make of that eh?[/p][/quote]I would probably have to say that it has nothing to do with gay marriage. That's just an actual fact.Mr. Mann.

Fairfax Sakes wrote:
Homosexuals have a higher RELATIVE incidence of HIV and AID than heteroseuxuals. Thats just a medical fact. What do you make of that eh?

Except for lesbians for whom transmission is extremely low. What do you make of that eh?

[quote][p][bold]Fairfax Sakes[/bold] wrote:
Homosexuals have a higher RELATIVE incidence of HIV and AID than heteroseuxuals. Thats just a medical fact. What do you make of that eh?[/p][/quote]Except for lesbians for whom transmission is extremely low. What do you make of that eh?High Wire

tradebooker wrote:
Why are we focusing on more gay marriages in Brighton? Why not try and get more hardcore ex convicts that have been reformed? Or ex drug users?

They don't exist that's why.

[quote][p][bold]tradebooker[/bold] wrote:
Why are we focusing on more gay marriages in Brighton? Why not try and get more hardcore ex convicts that have been reformed? Or ex drug users?[/p][/quote]They don't exist that's why.Brighton Visitor

pc?notme wrote:
absolutely disgusting...is this really something to be proud of? What must other countries think of us.So sad

Don't be such a nimby.

Get a life.

[quote][p][bold]pc?notme[/bold] wrote:
absolutely disgusting...is this really something to be proud of? What must other countries think of us.So sad[/p][/quote]Don't be such a nimby.
Get a life.Brighton Visitor